linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next] snd-hda: fix build errors

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <s5h4p20ccrl.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date:	Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:48:14 +0100
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Wu Fengguang <wfg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] snd-hda: fix build errors

At Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:42:02 -0800,
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
> Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:02:48 -0800,
> > Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
> >>
> >> First error comes from snd_hda_eld_proc_new() not being static
> >> when CONFIG_PROC_FS=n.  After that is fixed, the next problem is:
> >> ERROR: "snd_print_pcm_rates" [sound/pci/hda/snd-hda-intel.ko] undefined!
> >>
> >> so I made a static inline version of that one too, for CONFIG_PROC_FS=n.
> >> Please build/test more config variations.
> >>
> >>   LD [M]  sound/pci/hda/snd-hda-intel.o
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_eld.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_hwdep.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_generic.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x1d): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_realtek.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x3b): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_cmedia.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_analog.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x3b): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_atihdmi.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x3b): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_conexant.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_via.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> sound/pci/hda/patch_intelhdmi.o: In function `snd_hda_eld_proc_new':
> >> (.text+0x3b): multiple definition of `snd_hda_eld_proc_new'
> >> sound/pci/hda/hda_codec.o:(.text+0x58): first defined here
> >> make[4]: *** [sound/pci/hda/snd-hda-intel.o] Error 1
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
> >> cc: Wu Fengguang <wfg@...ux.intel.com>
> >> cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> >> ---
> >>  sound/pci/hda/hda_local.h |    7 ++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > Thanks, but these have been differently fixed on the latest ALSA tree.
> > snd_print_pcm_*() have to be defined no matter what CONFIG_PROC_FS is.
> 
> No problem.  Just for clarification, is linux-next one day behind
> your latest tree, or is linux-next using a different branch of it,
> or what?

The former, just due to the time zone :)


thanks,

Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/